Reproducibility of Left Ventricular Dimension Versus Area Versus Volume Measurements in Pediatric Patients With Dilated Cardiomyopathy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background— Multiple echocardiographic methods are used to measure left ventricular size and function. Clinical management is based on individual evaluations and longitudinal trends. The Pediatric Heart Network VVV study (Ventricular Volume Variability) in pediatric patients with dilated cardiomyopathy has reported reproducibility of several of these measures, and how disease state and number of beats impact their reproducibility. In this study, we investigated the impact of observer and sonographer variation on reproducibility of dimension, area, and volume methods to determine the best method for both individual and sequential evaluations. Methods and Results— In 8 centers, echocardiograms were obtained on 169 patients prospectively. During the same visit, 2 different sonographers acquired the same imaging protocol on each patient. Each acquisition was analyzed by 2 different observers; first observer analyzed the first acquisition twice. Intraobserver, interobserver, interacquisition, and interobserver-acquisition (different observers and different acquisition) reproducibility were assessed on measurements of left ventricular end-diastolic dimension, area, and volume. Left ventricular shortening fraction, ejection fraction, mass, and fractional area change were calculated. Percent difference was calculated as (interobservation difference/mean)×100. Interobserver reproducibility for both acquisitions was better for both volume and dimension measurements ( P ≤0.002) compared with area measurements, whereas intraobserver, interacquisition (for both observers), and interobserver-acquisition reproducibilities (for both observer-acquisition sets) were best for volume measurements ( P ≤0.01). Overall, interobserver-acquisition percent differences were significantly higher than interobserver and interacquisition percent differences ( P <0.001). Conclusions— In pediatric patients with dilated cardiomyopathy, compared with dimension and area methods, left ventricular measurements by volume method have the best reproducibility in settings where assessment is not performed by the same personnel. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT00123071.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".